Three frames for innovation policy: R&D, systems of innovation and transformative change

Science, technology, and innovation (STI) policies are not neutral; they are shaped by historical contexts and persistent 'frames' that guide how governments perceive problems and design solutions. Schot and Steinmueller delineate three distinct frames that have evolved over time, each with its own underlying model of innovation and policy rationale.

1. Innovation for Growth (Post-WWII): This frame views innovation as the commercialization of scientific discovery. It assumes that state-funded R&D leads to economic growth and that market failures in knowledge production justify government intervention. Regulation is treated as an ex-post 'add-on' to manage negative externalities.

2. National Systems of Innovation (1980s): Emerging during the era of globalization, this frame shifts focus to competitiveness. It emphasizes the importance of institutional linkages, learning processes, and the 'stickiness' of knowledge. Policy here aims to build networks and clusters to improve a nation's ability to absorb and utilize knowledge.

3. Transformative Change (Contemporary): This nascent frame is a response to the limitations of the first two in addressing grand challenges like climate change, inequality, and the Sustainable Development Goals. It argues that innovation is not inherently progressive and that current socio-technical systems (e.g., fossil-fuel-based mobility) are deeply implicated in persistent social and environmental problems.

The authors contend that while the first two frames remain relevant for economic growth, they are insufficient for addressing the systemic nature of modern crises. Transformative innovation policy requires a shift from technocratic, top-down approaches to inclusive, experimental processes. This involves 'directionality'—making explicit social choices about which pathways to pursue—and 'reflexivity,' where actors critically question their own deeply embedded routines and assumptions. By prioritizing this third frame, policymakers can move beyond mere optimization of existing systems toward fundamental, sustainable transitions.